Saturday, February 7, 2015

New Dog Breeding Standards

Dear SAOVA friends, this article was originally published in the January 30, 2015 issue of Dog News and is reprinted here by permission of the author.

New
Dog Breeding Standards

Carlotta
Cooper

Just
when you thought the issue of dog breeding standards was settled with
the publication of the APHIS rule – and the subsequent dismissal of
the Associated Dog Clubs of New York State lawsuit challenging the
legality of the rule – there is a new study being conducted by
Purdue University that could impact dog breeders. The project is
funded by the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), the Pet
Food Institute, and the World Pet Association. Additional support is
being provided by the Science Fellows program of the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the
USDA-APHIS Center for Animal Welfare – our good friends at
USDA-APHIS.

Candace
Croney, an associate professor of animal sciences at Purdue
University and director of its Center for Animal Welfare Science, is
in the process of conducting a two-year research project that will
collect data and test current nationwide dog breeding standards. The
purpose of the study is to create a uniform standard for dog care and
well-being in all 50 states.

"There
are lots of breeders who are not doing the best for their dogs, and
they don't know that they could be doing better," Croney said.
According to Croney, many breeders ignore certain unique and complex
challenges such as genetic characteristics and behavioral and
physical sciences. She cited breeds such as French Bulldogs and Pugs
as examples which required litters to be delivered by caesarean
section, saying that the constant surgery is harmful.

Croney
said she will also study several other factors that affect dog
welfare, such as housing.

Croney
said that her goal is education, not enforcement. "We're not
trying to police people," Croney said. "We want to give
them a tool to assess and improve the quality of life of a dog."

However,
Croney said that the study will include tools that could help
consumers and governments. Most of the data collected will come from
sites in Indiana and other midwest states because they are "perceived
to be the hotbed of problems of the commercial breeding of dogs,"
she said.

Croney
said her research will address many current problems in dog breeding.
She said that she hopes it leads to the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, which is a consultant on the project, updating its
guidelines (the Animal Welfare Act) — which would effectively
create a national dog breeding standard.

When
the standards are finalized, the Purdue Center for Animal Welfare
Science will develop education programs for breeders.

"Using
this approach will ensure the production and proper vetting of the
standards developed to improve voluntary compliance with best
practices," Croney said.

Croney
said the approach will also:

Help breeders make informed choices about participating in voluntary
dog welfare assurance programs.

Create a mechanism by which to address public concerns about
commercially bred dog welfare.

Demonstrate the pet industry's willingness to assume its ethical
obligation to regulate its animal care practices.

Croney
said the standards could also be adapted to enhance the care and
welfare of dogs in shelters, laboratories and other commercial
venues.

"It
is imperative that the U.S. pet industry demonstrate commitment to
animal well-being and to broad social responsibility by facilitating
efforts to improve the welfare of breeding dogs," Croney said.

"Capitalizing
on the center's expertise in animal welfare science and ethics will
help the pet industry

ensure
that all dogs are offered the quality of life they deserve."

A
final draft of the project has supposedly been written. Data
collection is due to begin this spring, and the study is supposed to
be complete by 2016.

Croney
said, "We don't want to write really good standards that no one
could live up to. And we don't want to write low standards that
impacts the quality of life for dogs." You can listen to an
interview with Dr. Croney on the Trent Loos radio program here.

Croney
was awarded both the HSUS Animals and Society Course Award, and the
Outstanding New Professor Award from the College of Agricultural
Sciences at Oregon State in 2003 for her teaching on Contentious
Issues in Animal Agriculture and Ethical issues in Animal
Agriculture. She has also been an animal welfare adviser to the
American Humane Association.

Some
dog breeders have applauded the project but it could present problems
for several reasons. Don't we already have what are supposed to be
science-based standards with the USDA's Animal Welfare Act? The USDA
is consulting on this project and Dr. Croney would like to see them
use the results to update their dog breeding guidelines. How much
more government intervention is acceptable in dog breeding? Should
the USDA/APHIS and the Animal Welfare Act tell breeders whether or
not their bitches can have caesarean sections or make other breeding
decisions for them?

One-size-fits-all
standards are never appropriate for dogs. With over 180 recognized
AKC breeds (and more breeds with other registries, as well as
intentionally crossbred dogs); in a country as large as the United
States with varying climates; and dogs bred and raised for different
purposes – is one national dog breeding standard really possible,
or even desirable? No one in their right mind would raise sled dogs
for the Iditarod the same way someone would raise Chihuahuas intended
to be pets. There are often good reasons why dogs are raised
differently.

PIJAC
is one of the groups funding this study. They represent a number of
commercial dog breeders and brokers and it's likely that they are
interested in finding ways to fight back against the ordinances that
have been banning the sale of pets in pet stores in various cities.
One way would be to be able to claim that their commercial breeders
meet voluntary blue ribbon standards of care.

“Many
involved in the breeding and sale of purebred dogs are understandably
concerned about the torrent of ordinances and statutes recently
adopted which essentially or outright ban the sale of purebred dogs.
But hope may be on the way-namely, Purdue’s animal care standards.

“These
standards are uniform 'science-based, nationwide animal care
standards for the commercial breeding and raising of dogs' that will
exceed those currently required by the Animal Welfare Act ('AWA')...

“According
to Andrew Hunte,
president and CEO of The Hunte Corporation, a USDA licensed animal
dealer, '[a]nimal rights organizations spend millions of dollars
annually to promote negative messages about pets sold at retail, even
though the facts do not support their claims. While they tout
adoption as an ‘alternative’ to purchasing a pet at retail, their
ultimate goal is to make sure that adoption isn’t just an
alternative—it’s the only option available to consumers. Groups
that once were considered mainstream are now promoting adoption as
the only responsible path to pet ownership. As a result, dozens of
responsible, well-regulated, tax-paying pet businesses across the
country have been forced to close.'”

The
article closes by saying, “Hopefully, when the Purdue Standards are
published and adopted, the public will feel assured that dogs raised,
bred, and housed according to those standards receive proper care.”

Mr.
Hunte has even stated that some of the commercial breeders that
supply puppies to his corporation will participate in the breeder
pilot program.

While
it might sound like a good idea for commercial breeders to “raise
the bar” and try to silence their critics, organizations like HSUS
will never be satisfied. Breeders could breed and raise puppies in
palaces and HSUS would still find something to criticize.

Aside
from trying to please animal rights groups, the first problem with
this study is that it is using data from what is perceived to be “the
hotbed of problems of the commercial breeding of dogs” to try to
create a national standard for breeding dogs. I do not want to speak
ill of any breeders but they are intentionally looking for problem
breeders to use in their study. What about all of the great breeders
who far exceed any rules and regulations that USDA-APHIS could
imagine? There are some excellent commercial breeders. There are
incredible show and hobby breeders who breed dogs beyond anything
Purdue could come up with in their guidelines. But they aren't using
this data in their study. Doesn't that mean the study is skewed from
the start and that it won't be helpful to good breeders? Yet good
breeders could also be forced to follow the rules that are created by
this study, even if it means a reduction in quality.

Secondly,
if the “Purdue Standards” are used as some kind of seal of
approval, what would that mean for a small breeder who does not breed
commercially or sell to pet stores? If that breeder did not
(voluntarily) follow the publicized and touted Purdue Standards,
would puppy buyers believe that their puppies were inferior? You
might breed show quality puppies in your home but if you don't follow
these allegedly voluntary Purdue Standards, would a puppy buyer
prefer to buy a commercially-bred puppy from a pet store?

Third,
whether or not the Purdue study comes up with guidelines that could
ever be applied to hobby breeders, we need to remember that, thanks
to APHIS, many former hobby breeders are now classified as
“commercial” breeders by the USDA. Any changes in dog breeding
standards that are adopted by the USDA in the future can impact many
de
facto
show and hobby breeders. While Dr. Croney may hedge and use the term
“voluntary” with regard to the standards, she has also mentioned
having the USDA adopt the standards in place of the current Animal
Welfare Act, so they would affect all
breeders.

The
AVMA has previously tried to create a model law for dog breeders that
included behavioral, exercise, and enrichment guidelines. It didn't
go far but it didn't have this kind of backing.

All
this boils down to the fact that while the Purdue study on dog
breeding may sound good in concept, it is loaded with potential
pitfalls for small breeders. Like every other attempt to regulate
some
breeders, the results often blow back and affect all
breeders. Keep watching for updates about this study and how it may
affect show and hobby breeders in the future.

1 comment:

They will never never be satisfied at the HSUS and other animal rights cult groups. Look at Prop 2 in CA. They are now saying they never meant "bigger cages" they "always meant cage FREE", so now that they egg ranchers have spent millions converting to "enriched cages" which is what they SAID they wanted, now they are falling back on the "exhibiting natural behavior" and the chickens must be able to fully extend their wings without touching another chicken. Never mind that chicken hardly ever flap their winds to full extension and prefer to lie in groups. It is not like the fly everywhere. It will be the same for this. set of standards that few will be able to meet and the idea that they will be voluntary is ludicrous. Hunte is setting himself up and throwing us under the bus but who can blame him? After all, many of "us" have targeted him fort ages.. watch out ,as they say Karma is a bitch.